Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| (USA) 5/10 - CITIZENS WARNED THEY WIL... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11063
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 - 6:03 pm: | 
|
This story happened in Kentucky, but those of us working nationally see these kinds of problems in Florida, California, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Arizona -- basically, nationwide.
In May 2010, Bullitt County (KY) citizens invited Black Box Voting to attend the primary election and speak to a gathering at a meeting about election protection.
Citizens were then warned by public officials that they would be ARRESTED if they hosted or attended the meeting.
VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS
The Kentucky Constitution Article 1 Part 4 affirms the right to freely communicate thoughts and opinions. Part 6 affirms the right of peaceful assembly. The United States Constitution also affirms the right to free speech and peaceful assembly. Any official who tries to stop a meeting by threatening arrest for hosting or attending the meeting is engaging in intimidation and civil rights violations.
CONTENT OF THE PROHIBITED MEETING
Not really germane to the issue, since US and state constitutions guarantee the right to freely express our thoughts and opinions, and the right of peaceful assembly guarantees the right to attend the speech.
But for anyone who cares to know, I covered election-related civil rights and how to monitor election checks and balances.
WHO TRIED TO BLOCK ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING?
It began with the Bullitt County elections official, County Clerk Kevin Mooney. I visited Mooney on May 12 and asked him what the problem was with this meeting. He stated (erroneously) that the husband of one of the people hosting the meeting was a candidate, and said there was an appearance of impropriety because it might look like a candidate is trying to gain influence over poll workers and therefore he objected to the meeting.
He was incorrect on his facts -- no wife of any candidate on the May ballot was organizing the meeting, and the county elections chief should know who's on the ballot -- but even if Mooney had been correct, this would not have been sufficient cause for blocking a meeting.
The meeting was nonpartisan and open to the public. Invitations were given to both Democrats and Republicans.
Kevin Mooney was concerned that Pioneer Village Police Chief David Greenwell (who will be a candidate for sheriff in November) might be perceived to be attempting to manipulate poll workers if -- in May -- his wife (Kathy Greenwell*) helped organize a public meeting about election protection. This statement makes even less sense when we realize that Mooney himself will be on the November ballot, and he has extensive direct access to poll workers and helps select them!
*Kathy Greenwell was one of the election protection advocates who traveled to New Hampshire in 2008 to help monitor chain of custody in the presidential primary.
Even if the May poll workers are identical to November poll workers (not likely), Mooney's access to poll workers would be much more intimate than Greenwell's. In fact, according to a recent news article, Mooney hires his own staff to act as poll workers.
Mooney would probably be offended by implications that he might try to manipulate poll workers, but if that's the case Greenwell -- widely regarded as an honest cop in Bullitt County -- should be even more offended. Lacking any evidence, for an election official to single out one candidate with such implications is inappropriate.
If Mooney is truly concerned about creating a wall between May poll workers and November candidates, he needs to recuse himself from his own role as county elections chief, since he will be on the November ballot himself running for County Clerk. Greenwell's opponent for the sheriff's race, whose employees also work the election, would need to recuse his employees as well.
None of that's going to happen, and therefore Mooney's contention that a nonpartisan public meeting in May should be banned because a wife of a future candidate helped arrange it is nonsensical.
Black Box Voting is a nonpartisan organization. We talk with and speak all kinds of events, never in a partisan manner.
BIGGER VENUE, MORE ATTENDANCE
The meeting was postponed because so many local citizens were intimidated by threats of arrest. It was rescheduled for a few days later, in a bigger venue. Not only did Bullitt County citizens attend the meeting, but people came in from six other Kentucky counties, and one women drove in from Indiana to attend.
"YOU MIGHT SAY SOMETHING ILLEGAL"
When I opened my speech, I asked if anyone had been threatened with arrest if they attended. Hands shot up around the audience. Later, I asked a party official why anyone would try to threaten people with arrest.
"Because you might urge them to do something illegal," was his answer. It is a crime in Kentucky to urge someone to commit a violation of election law -- vote buying and so forth being a tradition for election corruption in some regions.
But if I was going to urge people to break the law, it would be ME who would be arrested, not people attending the meeting. And you can't tell people they will be arrested for attending a meeting because you think someone else MIGHT break a law. And of course, I do not urge anyone to break the law in my speaking engagements.
FOLLOWING THE MEETING: SPECIAL EMERGENCY POLL WORKER TRAINING SESSION
I did urge citizens, including poll workers, to take checks and balances seriously. I explained why the seals were so important, and urged people to photograph the poll tapes to compare them with results, and explained that the poll book sign-in should be matched up to the number of votes.
This meeting took place on Sunday night. On Monday night, Kevin Mooney held a special poll worker training session. He later reported to the newspaper that he needed more poll workers (12 hours before the election) and that he had some of the employees of his office take over poll worker positions.
WHY EXTRA VIGILANCE IS APPROPRIATE
In my Bullitt County speech, I urged special care over seals, ballot accounting, and other checks and balances. Such vigilance is not unwarranted.
In Allegan County Michigan, observers discovered that an astonishing 55 percent of the precincts weren't able to be canvassed a second time because ballots were improperly handled (seals were not intact).
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/8/79449.html
In the Dekalb County, Georgia 2006 Primary the press reported that the machines functioned well, things went smoothly except for a few hiccups. Well, documents reveal such an attack of the hiccups that you or I would be put in the hospital if we got those hiccups.
Here are just a few examples:
"a husband was sent to one location while his wife, living at the same house, was sent to another. (The same thing happened in Bullitt County in the May 2010 election)
- Midvale Elementary –DRE #115511 customer said "agriculture commissioner" was not on ballot
(In Bullitt County May 2010, voters who did not live in Hillview were given ballots with Hillview races on them; after voting, there was really no way to know which ballots were from Hillview voters and which weren't, making it impossible to figure out who really won in Hillview). Back to Georgia:
- McLendon – Voting machine# 117018 seal number different – "broken in transit." Indian Creek Elem – voting machine #1 wrong seal no; voting machine #2 wrong seal No; Voting machine #3 wrong seal No; Voting machine #4 wrong seal No; Voting machine #5 did not receive; - Avondale Elem – voting machine # 4 – Seal number was 102898 not 117499; - Memorial South – voting machine #2 had different seal # on it; Marbut – voting machine had no seal and battery would not charge and machine closed down; - Knollwood Elem – Voting machine #3 found that red seal number was not correct; - Glennwood – Voting machine #3 – the security door was open. When we turned the voting machine on it asked for election media or security bay card. The supervisor's card did not work; - Brockett Elem – Voting machine seal not the same seal placed by Election Board
Click here for a huge list of additional "hiccups": http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/44150.html.
A PATTERN OF OBSTRUCTION AND INTIMIDATION
Given that PUBLIC elections cease to be PUBLIC if you bar the PUBLIC from observing or attending meetings about elections, the trend towards increasing obstruction and intimidation is disturbing.
BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA: Ellen Brodsky, a candidate for Election Supervisor, was barred from watching the canvass in her own election. She was arrested when she attempted to approach the building. She was found "not guilty" when she got her day in court.
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/137/77934.html
SUFFOLK COUNTY NEW YORK
A strange thing happened in Oysterponds. District officials decided to count the votes cast for school board in secret. Even Oysterponds school board president Ted Webb was ushered out of the room on election night.
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/8/80408.html
PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA
Below you will see a photograph showing shuttered, closed doors to the sole polling location for the city of South Tucson Arizona. Inside, poll workers performed critical election functions in complete secrecy.
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/79612.html
NEW HAMPSHIRE The link below contains the video documenting Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan telling citizens he has placed the main tallying function in a private area of the office, and therefore, prohibiting meaningful observation. Here is a portion of the transcript:
FREECHILD, to SCANLAN: So we're just wondering where the votes are being tallied, which computers, and which people are doing the tallying.
SCANLAN: All the people in this office are going to be doing it but again, this is the public part of the office, feel free to film whatever happens from here. We don't want any audio taken at people's office desks (gestures to another office behind him) because the nature of some of the conversations that we have. That's private, secretary of state business.
FREECHILD: So you're going to count--
SCANLAN: Well we do a lot of other things besides just the count, we're doing other business in the office. People are working on, you know, doing the tallies, we don't expect to have people over our shoulder.
FREECHILD: Are you certain that in the constitution, the count itself rather than the tallies...
New Hampshire Constitution, Article 32: "In open meeting...a moderator...shall sort and count the votes." New Hampshire Constitution, Article 8:"The public's right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted."
Scanlan continued to have the count done in a private area.
VIDEO - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDIFYSRffE4
BENTON COUNTY, OREGON
Observaton of absentee counting, by Glenn Wolfe: "I was brought to a small room...In this room, there were 3 people counting and opening up the ballot envelopes, placing them into piles of 10, and then enhancing votes or masking stray marks so the machines could read them.
I proceeded to take notes on my Blackberry, which was what I chose to take notes on since they asked us to leave all our stuff in another room due to space concerns...she told me that I would have to leave, as I was being "disruptive." I asked her what this meant, and she said someone thought I was "texting". I explained that I was taking notes, showed her and the elections supervisor the detailed notes I had been taking, and then I was just told I was making the workers "nervous"...
Jill Van Buren, the election supervisor suggested that observers bring something to read or knit.
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/165/78716.html
LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Los Angeles County, with nearly four million registered voters has a big impact on state politics. When I observed in L.A., I got to see the well organized tour, where citizens were directed to what the officials want them to watch. Meanwhile, we were subjected to various misleading statements. We were taken to an area on the third floor, with a wall of windows, where you look in upon a room full machines. Observers were told "this is the tallying area" -- but it was not. The real central tabulator area was located in an area a considerable distance from the windows, where the goings-on could not be viewed by anyone.
In violation of Election Law, County employees refused to allow viewing of any of several rooms where the real tallying was being done. When I pulled out the law, elections chief Conny McCormack responded by arranging for six sheriff's deputies to surround me in a semi-circle (while I remained quietly seated) blocking my viewing of even the room they pretended was the tallying room.
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/13095.html
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
When Black Box Voting board member Jim March insisted on watching the tabulation, he was arrested and charged with a felony (later dropped). In his own words: Jim March on taking back his civil rights:
"The CORE reason for doing this is our civil right to observe elections...They violated my basic civil right to observe the election (California Election Code 2300(a)(9)(A)) and in response I stopped “begging” to be allowed to observe the election and did so directly, by going through a door to get closer. At which point I was (expectedly) grabbed, stuffed and cuffed.
California Elections Code 15204 requires county election officials to make “all proceedings” “open to the view of the public”. California Election Code 2300(a)(9)(A) recognizes our basic civil right to observe elections: 2300(9)(A): You have the right to ask questions about election procedures and observe the elections process...
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/8568.html
It seems that elections officials can violate the law without consequence, but the public can be intimidated under imaginary pretexts when they try to learn about and watch over their own elections.
* * * * *
WHAT SHOULD WE DO ABOUT THESE PROBLEMS?
The first thing we need to DO is TALK ABOUT public election protection as a RIGHT, because you cannot have liberty -- an undisputed human right -- if the citizenry is not sovereign over its own government. The public is not sovereign if the choosing of our leaders is done in concealment, by the very government officials who hold power.
KENTUCKY CONSTITUTION ON PUBLIC RIGHT TO CONTROL GOVERNANCE
The Bill of Rights, Section 4
"All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper."
But here's the kicker: The public doesn't understand this very well.
Job #1 right now is to talk openly about our right to control our own governance, emphasizing that we must be able to see and authenticate every essential step of our own elections, without need for special expertise.
When our right to meet and talk openly of such things is met with threats of arrest, we need to kick up a fuss and meet these attempts with BIGGER venues and MORE open discussion than ever.
That's just what happened in Bullitt County, Kentucky, thanks to exceptionally hard work by local citizens Kathy Greenwell and Suzy Watkins.
* * * * *
More on Bullitt County:
Elections give you: The judge, the prosecutor and the sheriff
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/47065.html
MOONSHINE ELECTION SERIES - Original investigative reports by Bev Harris:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/moonshine1.pdf
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/moonshine2.pdf
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/moonshine3.pdf
PERMISSION TO EXCERPT OR REPRINT GRANTED, WITH LINK TO http://www.blackboxvoting.org |
Tom Courbat
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Leftisbest
Post Number: 114
Registered: 6-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 - 6:31 pm: |
|
This is an outrage to every citizen of the U.S. To use police power to intimidate people from even attending a meeting is reminiscent of the NAZI party tactics.
Bev, you are right. Our job is to emphasize that we must be able to see and authenticate every essential step of our own elections, without need for special expertise.
Through EDA, a lawsuit has been filed against Riverside County for failure to provide public documents in their original form (e.g. Excel spreadsheets - NOT PDF copies of same), and we are preparing to take depositions soon.
The persistence of John Brakey and Jim March in Pima County, with the fine legal leadership of attorney Bill Risner is a shining example of what can be accomplished by a small band of dedicated citizens. I hope we can provide a similar victory in Riverside County in the very near future.
If it's kept secret, it's secret for a reason. And I can't imagine it's a legitimate reason, or they would tell us why. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11064
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 - 7:17 pm: |
|
Hi Tom! I'm looking forward to following events in that lawsuit. Riverside is a nonstop example of obstructionism. Thank goodness for you and other citizens like yourself. |
Karen Nelson
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Kankan
Post Number: 61
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 - 9:22 pm: |
|
What about open meeting laws, can't those be applied to vote counting? Its a meeting of public officials afterall |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11065
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 - 10:22 pm: |
|
Karen - you are absolutely right. And as a matter of fact, New Hampshire's constitutional requirement to count votes in open meeting has never been tested with litigation, but the use of concealed electronic counting is a constitutional violation in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and some other states. And in the bigger picture, just as Germany has deemed counting processes which conceal the process from the public to be unconstitutional, such processes violate our own right to public elections as well.
However -- and this is important -- because the American public does not currently have a clear understanding of how concealed election processes violate their right to sovereignty, the foundation is not yet in place to prevail, either in court or with legislation.
That's why I am emphasizing that we're going to have to work this issue from the ground up, with public education, rather than from the top down. |
Terri Ann Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Terri_ann_smith
Post Number: 8
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 - 10:42 pm: |
|
Greetings Crew,
I read your Kentucky news. Similar things happened in WV. Below is video of the "drawing of random precincts for recount".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aZQsE-ok1I
This is only a small window of what happened in WV. Huntington News Network, www.huntingtonnews.com, has a little more of the story. The whole story will be in an affidavit to the SOS when I get it finished. I will forward it.
But, to correlate with your Kentucky news, I was blocked from observing the official canvassing after I showed up at the unannounced drawing shown in the video. At the official canvassing, the county attorney made me stay in a corner where I couldn't videotape the peeled up envelopes containing the ballots.
The good news is that no one, and I mean know one, in Cabell County had any clue that this type of thing was going on, even when it was right in front of their faces. Now, alot of people have opened their eyes. There are still a few who watch the video and can't see anything wrong. Mainly, the completely naive and trusting type, and the people at the SOS's office.
Cheers,
Terri Ann Smith
(304) 525-1381 |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11066
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 - 10:45 pm: |
|
Terri Ann,
I am SO GLAD you were there, and that you posted the video link here.
By the way, wasn't it you that got blocked in Ohio in 2008, with Secretary of State Brunner pulling an anti-loitering law out of her derriere in an attempt to justify preventing observation of the tally? |
Terri Ann Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Terri_ann_smith
Post Number: 9
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 12:32 am: |
|
Bev,
Yep.
And, not only from out of her a!#, but all the way back from the dead as well. This was the same no-loitering law that was overturned by the Ohio Supreme Court based on a lawsuit filed by CBS. The suit was filed on the previous SOS, Kenneth Blackwell, when CBS reporters were blocked from viewing the ballot counting.
Speaking of "back from the dead", in Lincoln County, WV, it has been reported that several deceased voters resurrected for the 2010 May Primary. |
Terri Ann Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Terri_ann_smith
Post Number: 10
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 12:49 am: |
|
Correction on my last post:
It was a Federal Judge that overturned Blackwell's loitering "directive". It wasn't even a law. And, it was several media outlets in addition to CBS that sued, because they weren't allowed near the precincts to conduct exit polling.
http://www.ap.org/foi/foi_102706b.html
Terri |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 5649
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 6:11 am: |
|
Fabulous video, Terri Ann.
You did a great job capturing all that. The text on the video is helpful in pointing out the things that are seriously wrong (illegal?) with what occurred.
It was ultra-creepy seeing them pull the precincts to be used for the recount a day ahead of the election.
It was ultra-creepy seeing that guy leave the room with the bag after someone asked to check the bag's contents to make sure all the precincts were included.
I gather from your comments that they also did not have a legal quorum physically present. (I.e. the guy with the bag was not someone who counted towards the quorum.) Can you please clarify this?
Bev, are the grounds on which an election can be challenged when rules are broken like this? Could they at least file to have a new set of counties for recheck drawn in public on the day of the election? (Preferably this time not using a bag with flaps at the bottom where some papers can get stuck!) |
Charles Christopher
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ilikeinfo
Post Number: 164
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:40 am: |
|
Generally related, it's a growing issue:
"Debate Sparks Over Video Recording Of Arrests"
http://wjz.com/local/preakness.fight.internet.2.1708562.html
And of course police are allowed to video the people they arrest, not the other way around. There are far too many great examples of this, but here is a very good one that makes the point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KluItc365hU
Note carefully the paramedic pulls away AFTER the women screams. He's going to HER AID.
Here is the police dashcam video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkGs9EhDBSg
This is why we are seeing an all around attack on citizen videos and recordings. They are exposing too many issues that are trying to be covered up ... It would appear accountability is no longer a priority for "officials" in any departments.
When I grew up all police cars said:
"To Serve
And Protect"
Notice that is not there anymore ....
Here is a fantastic little audio recorder I highly recommend, it's abilities when recording in WAV mode are magnificent and will record for about 6 hours on a fresh set of batteries and is very tiny for concealment:
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1473
It's also a portable player thus disguising it's use as you switch to record mode, and has a slot for up to a 16 gig micro sd card. Even a tiny person can easily hide this. It's a semi pro recorder so forget about comparing to cell phones, there is no comparison. This will pick up everything in a room very clearly.
Problem definition *FIRST*, solution formulation *SECOND*.
The frog just needs to *SEE* the thermometer
|
Terri Ann Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Terri_ann_smith
Post Number: 11
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 2:37 pm: |
|
Catherine,
That's an interesting question. Thanks for pointing that out. I need to read the statute again, but I'm pretty sure the statute doesn't clearly specifiy the means by which the "random pick" is obtained. It basically just says 5% of the precincts will be handcounted 5 days after the election, and picked at random. I doesn't state whether the commissioners are to perform the pick, or their deputies.
I think we definitely have them on the "quorum" part, however, regarding the presence of the commissioners in general. Two commissioners are supposed to provide oversight for all canvassing procedures. "Telephone meetings" are allowed, but only for making decisions, not for conducting decided actions.
Also, I think we have them on the "2 person custody of the materials law". It is law in WV that all canvassing procedures are overseen by pairs of people, whether they be commissioners, deputies, poll workers, etc. When Chris Tatum left the room alone with the bag, he clearly violated this law in my opinion.
WV has pretty good legislation for promoting machine accuracy compared to many other states, however, I'm going to push legislators to mandate handcounts immediately following elections, along with the random picks. This should all be video-taped with several witnesses. If you allow too much time in between these procedures, then the "chain of custody" becomes an issue. Especially when incumbents are overseeing their own election.
The laws should be changed regarding this as well.
This is going to be a fun one to sort out, but aren't they all?
Thanks So Much For Your Input,
Terri Ann Smith |
Marian Beddill
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Uu7thprinciple
Post Number: 215
Registered: 8-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 3:53 pm: |
|
Terri Ann;
About your comment: "...5% of the precincts will be handcounted 5 days after the election, and picked at random. I doesn't state whether the commissioners are to perform the pick, or their deputies...."
We have set a practice in my county, which everybody likes. Our state (WA) is now all VBM ("absentee" ballots). My county uses high-speed OpScan systems for the tallies of the paper ballots, and those machines are first run on election day (though no results are output until the close of the "polls" at 8:00p.m.) And, we have an established procedure of certified citizen observers (with badges), who may be present in any of the ballot processing areas while work is going on.
For the selection of sample batches for hand-count tally verification, the observers in the machine room during that day, pick six random batches - usually while they are running thru the machines. Those batches are then placed in flagged boxes in a special holding area, and hand counted the next morning, again with observers present (and many details of seal numbers, etc cared for.) We like the system.
Last year, there was a difference found in one batch. It was immediately resolved, to the satisfaction of all present. (One mark was faint, and the machine read it as "NoVote" but the people said "Vote".)
Marian
http://NoLeakyBuckets.org
|
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 11067
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 8:18 am: |
|
As a sidenote to the quorum issue, in Bullitt County two of the three members of the board of elections left for a lengthy period of time (about an hour) during the middle of the election night tally. This left only the Democrat to observe. It is a democrat-controlled county. I am checking on the legality of that situation, since there was only a Democrat observing the Republican primary recount during that time.
The third member of the board of elections is the sheriff, and in this election, the sheriff had a member of his staff stand in for him. Both the sheriff's staff member and the Republican board member left for a lengthy period of time. I have requested records on this incident, since they say they were going to a polling place about a problem. The correct course of action would be to have someone else go to the polling place or to appoint a stand-in to observe the count on their behalf.
The memory card chain of custody was spotty, especially while the two board members were not present. I'm preparing a video on that, and Terri Anne, your video was helpful in that it shows how to parse out a limited issue from the election and cover it, including contextual information.
I'm still unclear on one point in the West Virginia tape - was this drawing process done before or after the election? |
Tony Rutherford
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Irishsetter
Post Number: 1
Registered: 5-2010
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 2:46 pm: |
|
On Terri's WV tape, she attended the canvas drawing on Friday. There is a dispute about what precincts were picked. The clerk has admitted to changing one, but based on Terri's arrive time on Monday, it may not have been public. The Herald Dispatch said the ethics commission said nothing done wrong; but SOS declined to comment.
Our stories on the video:
http://www.huntingtonnews.net/local/100524-rutherford-localcanvassprocedure.html
http://www.huntingtonnews.net/local/100528-rutherford-localcabellcountyclerk.htm l
http://www.huntingtonnews.net/local/100527-rutherford-localelectionvideo.html
HD Canvas did not violate open meeting laws:
http://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/x813781202/Official-Canvass-did-not-violate- open-meetings-law |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 5650
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, May 30, 2010 - 6:57 am: |
|
Another question for Terri, after reading Tony Rutherford's articles--after the numbers were first drawn, were the pieces of paper shown to anyone else at the time? Or do we only have the word of the man who read them out, that they were what he said they were?
(Which numbers he said were drawn is in dispute because the audio quality is poor. There'd be no dispute about this if the numbers had been immediately posted or shown to all the observers.) |
Charles Christopher
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ilikeinfo
Post Number: 168
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, May 31, 2010 - 12:09 pm: |
|
"Michigan Considers Law to License Journalists"
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/28/michigan-considers-law-license-journalists
A Michigan lawmaker wants to license reporters to ensure they’re credible and vet them for “good moral character.”
As defined by the state ... But of course ...
Problem definition *FIRST*, solution formulation *SECOND*.
The frog just needs to *SEE* the thermometer
|
Terri Ann Smith
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Terri_ann_smith
Post Number: 12
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 2, 2010 - 3:19 pm: |
|
Answers for Bev and Catherine:
Bev,
The drawing of the "random precincts for hand recount" was on the Friday after the election. Upon recent discovery, Tony Rutherford found a WV SOS directive that allows canvassing for Primary Elections to begin the Friday following the election. This condradicts WV Code under canvassing procedures for elections in general.
I personally hate the practice of governmental agencies having their own power to add their own wording to existing legislation in the form of directives, rules, yada yada. It takes much of the power of lawmaking from our elected officials and turns it over to unelected appointees who are in turn unaccountable to the public.
Catherine,
The only other person who viewed the picked precinct numbers was Karen Cole, County Clerk and incumbent candidate. You can view this at the very end of the video as Nancy Cartmill directs Chris Tatum to hand the picked precincts over to Cole.
By the way, you can also see in the video that Nancy didn't even look at the precincts as she drew them. She just handed them to Chris, and he proceeded to read them off. |
Phillip Caine
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Phillip_caine
Post Number: 71
Registered: 3-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, June 3, 2010 - 10:49 am: |
|
Anyone remember the PBS thing awhile back? "Video The Vote?"
It went exactly at odds with what was happening on the streets, and more specifically in all California polling places. "no permission" is what the election officials said, if you did video they said they could have you arrested.
Speaking of video.
Are Cameras the New Guns?
http://gizmodo.com/5553765/are-cameras-the-new-guns |
Charles Christopher
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ilikeinfo
Post Number: 175
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, June 3, 2010 - 1:15 pm: |
|
>Are Cameras the New Guns?
>http://gizmodo.com/5553765/are-cameras-the-new-guns
Yes they are.
However those being recorded frequently confiscate the cameras. So the current evolution is live casting. In other words folks are not recording to the camera, they are feeding their camera, via the internet, to a live server which records the event AND allows others to watch real time.
The effect is obvious. The moment folks know it's a live cast they back off quick. In fact many "interesting" events have been caught this way. When "officials" know they are live, and being recorded, by an unknown number of people across the world they behave just a little differently.
Rumor has it police, etc, are now obtaining jamming equipment as it's their only defence. However jamming communications in the US is ILLEGAL. So this is a very critical step they are taking in response to the live casting. The moment jamming becomes legal watch out .... Restaurants and movie theaters have for many years wanted to install jammers to kill cell phones. There are actualy expensive high tech paints (which IS legal) used for this as well. So a lot of thing radically change if jamming becomes legal in the US ...
Sites that do this are youtube like. In other words you load and app and run it on your cell phone or palmtop PC. It's not expensive special high tech gear. I've not tried it myself so that is the limit of my understanding.
Problem definition *FIRST*, solution formulation *SECOND*.
The frog just needs to *SEE* the thermometer
|
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 3556
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, June 4, 2010 - 10:27 am: |
|
I THINK I have a story on cameras to top these. In 2007, after I was no longer my county's Election Director, I was designated by my political party as their designated "observer" of the returns in my old office on Election Night. My successor tried to have me excluded. When that didn't work, she asked me if I had a camera. I informed her I did - a Hi8 analog video camera. She told me, "you know you can't have that in here." I told her "I know nothing of the sort - get the Election Day judge down here RIGHT NOW, and we'll let him rule!" I got to keep my camera, but was ASKED by the judge to not tape until I saw something go wrong, which I had the expertise to know, and then summon him to rule on who gets custody of what I would tape. I decided that was sufficient. Nothing ever went awry. I didn't expect it would. Yes, I was perhaps UNIQUELY qualified to know what something going wrong would look like and recognize it instantly. But the judge was aware of that and took it into account. My puropse was not to tote a camera to make people look foolish gratuitously, which is astonishly easy to do to perhaps 99.5% of people. It's no great accomplishment.
But you need to know what your rights are and be "ballsy" enough to ASK for the judge to rule. Never show weakness. Show resolve and accept no BS! You'll usually win, unless the judge is corrupt, too.
==========================================
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
"Public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed". --Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
